WORLD  
comments_image -

U.S. Raid into Syria an Idiotic Move

The attack give Iraq's neighbors proof that the presence of U.S. troops on Iraq's soil is a major reason to worry.
November 1, 2008  |  
 
Advertisement
 

U.S. military incursion on a Syrian village late last month was illogical and ill-timed.

The U.S. has a formidable force in Iraq with massive air power which theoretically can attack whenever and where it wishes.

But the attack on Syria, regardless of whatever was mentioned with regard to the "value" of its target has come at a difficult time first for Washington, second the Iraqi government and third Iraq's neighbors.

The U.S. now finds it extremely difficult to persuade Iraqis that the security agreement it wants to impose on Iraq is for the benefit of Iraq as a country and its regional interests.

The attack gave Iraq's neighbors, particularly Syria and Iran, the proof that the presence of U.S. troops on Iraq's soil is a real source of worry and now they fear if the troops stay they will turn their land into a theater for their military operations.

What made matters worse was the irresponsible and light-headed statement by the Iraqi government spokesman trying to "legitimize" the attack even before the U.S. had officially reacted on it.

Thus, the attack and the way the government handled it are very good signs of a state without sovereignty and responsibility. Otherwise, how foreign troops based on a country's soil could attack a foreign neighboring state without this country's approval and moreover this country's government instead of denouncing the act welcomes it.

Forces opposing the security agreement now use the attack as an example of what will happen in case the agreement is passed. Even those who were for it now ask for substantial revisions.

Victory in the "war on terror" cannot be achieved by launching military attacks on Iraq's neighbors. There will be no stability and peace in Iraq if its neighbors feel threatened.

If U.S. Republicans think such attacks will increase their chances of winning the White House for a third term they are wrong.

They need "heavyweight" victories like capturing or killing Bin Laden for example. This is the event the media will jump on and pave the way for the Republican presidential nominee to win the elections.

This was an ill-timed operation with negligible military benefits.

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest World headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: iraq, war on terror, syria
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
The Dark Truth Behind the Kochs' Struggle for Control of the Cato Institute

By Ryan Cooper | Washington Monthly

 
 
Outrage: Kansas Pastor Wants the Government to Kill Gays

By Zandar | Balloon-Juice

 
 
How Right-Wing Media Pounced On Obama's 'Polish Death Camp' Gaffe

By Steve M. | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Study: Marijuana Linked to Lower Mortality Rate for Patients with Psychotic Disorders

By Paul Armentano | NORML

 
 
Planned Parenthood Endorses Obama, Eviscerates Romney With New Ad

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
WikiLeaks' Assange Loses Extradition Battle, Legal Wrangling May Continue

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker Transfers $100,000 From Recall Campaign to Legal Defense Fund

By Laura Clawson | Daily Kos

 
 
Glenn Greenwald: Obama's Secret Kill List "The Most Radical Power a Government Can Seize"

By Amy Goodman, Nermeen Shaikh | Democracy Now!

 
 
Oops! Romney Launches New App, Misspells "America"

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
Ed Schultz On Florida's Purge of 180,000 Voters

By Sarah Seltzer | AlterNet

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 1 ]